P3D Re: The world is ortho after all...

[Larry Berlin <lberlin@xxxxxxxxx>]

>Date: Sun, 14 Dec 1997
>From: "Dr. George A. Themelis" writes:
>.....................
>You see Larry... You have your own religion... You are not an "atheist".
>If I understand it correctly, you are saying that one should change the 
>stereo base depending on the subject, to achieve a good ratio of base to
>distance.  This is your own philosophy of stereo photography.  What is the 
>physical or esthetical justification behind this theory?  There simply 
>isn't any.  At least, "ortho-advocates" say: "This is the way we view the 
>world".
>

*****  The physical and aesthetic aspects are the most obvious ones. It
looks better. In addition, it supports the real way we perceive the world
around us. If we want to see something better, we usually put our faces
closer to that something. Why? Both to increase the relative size of the
apparent details, and strengthen or accentuate the parallactic depth
information. Ortho exists in some form wherever we choose to place our eyes.
Why souldn't a stereo camera system support the real way we experience
things, variably? Use it to accentuate or understate depth factors, just as
you might otherwise use gels and filters to do the same with color. 

Depth is part of the stereo palette, and it's always relative to something.
Perhaps Einstein's theory of relativity was in reality a theory of universal
3Dness. ;-)

Larry Berlin

Email: lberlin@xxxxxxxxx
http://www.sonic.net/~lberlin/
http://3dzine.simplenet.com/


------------------------------